SNP MSPs Aileen Campbell and Angela Constance highlighted the potential of a Yes vote to guarantee access to education and training for young people. Meanwhile, Better Together published analysis which it said showed that breaking up the UK would cost Scottish families dear. The SNP pointed to the draft constitution published by the Scottish Government, which sets out a guarantee of access to education, training or employment for people up to the age of 24. And they argued that independence will transform childcare, saving families almost £5,000 per child each year. Ms Constance said: The process of writing Scotlands new constitution will be an important part of our nations history - and opens up a huge range of opportunities for everyone in Scotland, but particularly for our children and young people. The Scottish Governments draft constitution proposes that we use Scotlands wealth to provide a constitutional guarantee of access to education, training or employment for young people up to the age of 24. The SNP has committed to giving all three and four-year-olds, and vulnerable two-year-olds, 1,140 hours of childcare a year by the end of the first Parliament in an independent Scotland. Ms Campbell said: With the full economic powers of independence we can transform childcare in Scotland - benefiting 240,000 children and saving families almost £5,000 per year. What a contrast with the Westminster government - whose unfair welfare cuts could push 100,000 more children in Scotland into poverty by 2020. Meanwhile, the No campaign published an analysis of the impact independence would have on the everyday cost of living in Scotland, saying that staying part of the UK keeps costs down. Better Together said it looked at the impact independence would have on things like energy bills, train tickets and supermarket bills and concluded that costs would increase either because of the larger black hole in an independent Scotlands finances or the loss of pooling and sharing resources across the UK. Scottish Labour MSP Jackie Baillie said: Much of this debate has rightly focused on the big economic questions of currency and funding for our public services. But the cost of living for families in Scotland is also at the front of peoples minds. Times are hard enough as it is for families all across Scotland without increasing costs even more with independence. The fact is that independence would cost families in Scotland dear. The supermarket bosses and the energy experts have been very clear - leaving the UK would push up costs for families in Scotland. Being part of the UK we can spread the cost across an economy of more than 63 million people, rather than taking all the burden on the shoulders of Scottish families alone. Where is the sense in taking on all that risk? Responding, SNP MSP Linda Fabiani said: Scotland is one of the most prosperous countries in the world, with more wealth per head than France, Japan and the UK. But for too many it doesnt feel that way. Westminster is failing Scotlands families - the No campaigns leader Alistair Darling was the architect of the crash that has led to a massive rise in the cost of living in recent years. She added: Independence will offer families a better deal in a fairer, more prosperous Scotland - and with recent polling putting the Yes vote on a knife edge it is clear that families across the country are waking up to the benefits that a Yes vote will bring. Comments Peter Piper, Ayrshire So to sum up the whole debate, the YES side are looking for good things for Scotland, and the NO side are looking for bad things. Tony Little It makes you wonder how it was and is possible for almost 200 countries in the world to get by doesnt it? Or is Scotland uniquely incapable of managing its own affairs? alexander duncan, edinburgh Scotland is wealthier than France,Japan and the UK.Why then must we have a currency union ?.Stating something over and over dose not make it a fact..If we are that wealthy why NO bank or currency of our own ?. Alex. McEwan, Gartocharn Let me think a minute.... Jackie Baillie..... This is the person who can inflate the number of jobs at The Base to 16,000 when the civilian compliment is of the order of 4,000 at its maximum. Why therefor can I not believe anything she says, especially connected with figures? (That is of course a rhetorical question.) Peter Piper, Ayrshire Alex. McEwan, Gartocharn She is only rivalled by Alistair Darling who talks about 8.000 jobs at Faslane when the Astute and Trafalgar fleet move to Faslane by 2017. So were losing jobs that arent even here yet! Paul Hart I got to the bit that said, Meanwhile, the No campaign published an analysis of the impact................... and then thought to myself, i wonder if i can guess whats coming next. I was right. John Souter Take the energy threat advanced by Ms J Baillie energy will cost more in Scotland? Scotland harvests and markets the product - is she under the impression its sent all the way to London for cost enhancement before being sent back to Scotland. Is she aware of the subtle difference between the im and ex of ports? She is no doubt sentient, but is she conscious of it. John Rose, Glasgow I got a BT leaflet about the cost of living in an iScotland through the door. It Stated that the cost of transporting the food from England to Scotland would mean that prices would go up. I have a problem with this analysis: Scotland is self sufficient in food, England isnt, so if food is being transported in any direction it is likely to be heading south, not north, So it is Englands prices that would go up. It also sort of shows the England-centric view that BT have of the UK (It was them that mentioned England in their leaflet, not me here) Why do BT feel that they need to rely on lies and obvious falsehoods to make their case? .Do they take us for idiots?
Posted on: Sun, 31 Aug 2014 09:25:45 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015